The scene in the glittering ballroom of the Istana Hotel in central Kuala Lumpur was unusual, to say the least.
Hundreds of political activists from Malaysia's People's Justice Party, Keadilan, were joined by businessmen, diplomats and journalists to discuss political reform in Southeast Asia. They dined on curried mutton and chicken and, Malaysia being an Islamic country, drank orange juice and coffee.
But when the guests settled back to listen to the after-dinner speeches, the extraordinary nature of the occasion became apparent.
ILLUSTRATION: YUSHA
This wasn't a government function and no Malaysian ministers were invited.
It was, to put it bluntly, a lavish exercise in political subversion, for Keadilan is an opposition party led by the black sheep of Malaysian politics, Anwar Ibrahim, and his wife, Wan Azizah Wan Ismail.
Anwar has become a non-person, officially speaking, since he was ousted as deputy prime minister in 1998 and jailed by the government of former prime minister Mahathir Mohamad.
His party had to obtain a permit even to hold the banquet at all -- not always easy, since permission is often withheld and many hotel managements are reluctant to be associated with "troublemakers."
There were nervous jokes about keeping a watch on the door in case the Police Special Branch burst in and arrested everyone under the detested Internal Security Act.
And when the speeches began, it became evident that the real target of the discussion on reform was not Myanmar or some other regional regime but Malaysia itself.
One party, the United Malays National Organization, has dominated Malaysian politics since independence from Britain in 1957 and is used to having its own way, winning a virtual landslide victory last year that Keadilan and other opponents say were manipulated.
But as events across the world continue to show, virtual one-party states, pseudo-democracies and self-perpetuating ruling elites are going out of fashion.
Many Malaysians would say such descriptions do not apply to them. And perhaps it was a coincidence that Ukraine's ambassador attended the dinner. But perhaps not.
The people of Ukraine, along with those of Georgia, Serbia, Lebanon, Kyrgyzstan and Indonesia, have all recently opted for a new brand of genuinely pluralist politics.
Anwar's purpose in holding the banquet seemed to be to suggest that the time for a similar change in Malaysia was fast approaching, too.
The guest speakers certainly thought so. Datuk Yeop Adlan Bin Che Rose, a former Malaysian ambassador, denounced "political gangsterism" in Malaysia "legitimized by the use and abuse of the Westminster system of parliamentary democracy." He decried "endemic corruption and cronyism at the highest levels of government," ridiculing official pledges to mount a crackdown on graft.
"You can pour any amount of perfume on dung," he said. "But when the alcohol evaporates, what you are left with is still shit."
Progressive Thai Senator Kraisak Choonhavan said that his own country had suffered years of violent military dictatorship before establishing constitutional civilian government. Malaysians such as Anwar had been fortunate in one sense, he said.
"In Thailand they don't lock you up. They just shoot you," he said.
Amien Rais, the former speaker of the Indonesian parliament who helped lead the 1998 pro-democracy revolution that toppled General Suharto, spelled out the steps required if lasting, meaningful reform were to be achieved. Constitutional protections for human rights, freedom of religion and the press, clean governance and the pre-eminence of the rule of law were essential building blocks in the construction of a truly democratic state, he said.
"Under Suharto our republic was transformed into some sort of kingdom," Rais said. "He was suffering from Louis XIV syndrome -- `l'etat, c'est moi.'"
Things were not so bad in Malaysia, he conceded. But he warned that a reformed Indonesia, for all its remaining imperfections, was leaving its neighbor behind.
Anwar's concluding speech was listened to in rapt silence. He said the movement for reformasi in Malaysia could not be constrained for much longer. Unemployment was rising, the economy was sinking under the weight of incompetence and corruption and foreign investors were taking flight. Attacking his nemesis, Mahathir, he said the official gagging and self-censorship of Malaysia's media were reminiscent of "Nazi Germany's propaganda machine."
After recuperating abroad from his six-year jail ordeal, he said he would come home to Malaysia at the end of the year.
"I am committed to change and will continue to work with all progressive forces in Malaysia to pursue the reform agenda," he pledged.
Anwar's permanent return next year could presage significant upheavals in Malaysia, especially if an economic downturn exacerbates political discontent. But that may be still in the future. What was startling about the "Evening with Anwar" at the Istana Hotel in downtown Kuala Lumpur was the powerful strength of feeling, freely expressed, against a continuation of the status quo.
"We are wallowing in our own muck," protested Datuk Yeop Adlan Bin Che Rose.
It was time, he suggested, for all Malaysians to stand up and brush themselves down.
A few weeks ago in Kaohsiung, tech mogul turned political pundit Robert Tsao (曹興誠) joined Western Washington University professor Chen Shih-fen (陳時奮) for a public forum in support of Taiwan’s recall campaign. Kaohsiung, already the most Taiwanese independence-minded city in Taiwan, was not in need of a recall. So Chen took a different approach: He made the case that unification with China would be too expensive to work. The argument was unusual. Most of the time, we hear that Taiwan should remain free out of respect for democracy and self-determination, but cost? That is not part of the usual script, and
Behind the gloating, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) must be letting out a big sigh of relief. Its powerful party machine saved the day, but it took that much effort just to survive a challenge mounted by a humble group of active citizens, and in areas where the KMT is historically strong. On the other hand, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) must now realize how toxic a brand it has become to many voters. The campaigners’ amateurism is what made them feel valid and authentic, but when the DPP belatedly inserted itself into the campaign, it did more harm than good. The
For nearly eight decades, Taiwan has provided a home for, and shielded and nurtured, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). After losing the Chinese Civil War in 1949, the KMT fled to Taiwan, bringing with it hundreds of thousands of soldiers, along with people who would go on to become public servants and educators. The party settled and prospered in Taiwan, and it developed and governed the nation. Taiwan gave the party a second chance. It was Taiwanese who rebuilt order from the ruins of war, through their own sweat and tears. It was Taiwanese who joined forces with democratic activists
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) held a news conference to celebrate his party’s success in surviving Saturday’s mass recall vote, shortly after the final results were confirmed. While the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) would have much preferred a different result, it was not a defeat for the DPP in the same sense that it was a victory for the KMT: Only KMT legislators were facing recalls. That alone should have given Chu cause to reflect, acknowledge any fault, or perhaps even consider apologizing to his party and the nation. However, based on his speech, Chu showed
RSS